Based on previous experience we can expect that:
Elon Musk Says Tesla Will Unveil Its Robotaxi on August , 2025
Elon Musk Says Tesla Will Unveil Its Robotaxi on August , 2026
Elon Musk Says Tesla Will Unveil Its Robotaxi on August , 2027
Elon Musk Says Tesla Will Unveil Its Robotaxi on August , 2028
...
Elon Musk Says Tesla Will Unveil Its Robotaxi on August , 2043
...
etc, etc, Ad Nauseam.

Let's hope that's without massive power outages thanks to an absence of weather proofing enabled by Texas' deregulated energy market that caused massive amounts of damage to Texan energy users who will now not be compensated. The reason being that the power companies whose 'business models' (a.k.a. incompetence and greed) caused the mess in the first place can't be held liable for it due to Texas' deregulated 'business friendly' energy market.

Since you seem to be too dull to divine it from my previous comment let me explain this to you again. I have a very low opinion of the intelligence of the January 6, 2021 rioters and I don't seriously think these people had a realistic chance to succeed at the things they chanted about doing when they entered the capitol. All I am saying is that Hillary Clinton was pretty on the money when she called these people 'a basket of deplorables'. Come to think of it, just the shit smearing part all by itself qualifies these people for the 'basket of deplorables' title, no guns required. Mind you, if any of these morons were stupid enough to bring a gun to the capitol riot, that's certainly a bonus since it will significantly lengthen the jail sentences they'll get.

Sure and America lost its collective shit over that comment at the time. Yet today, ten years later, after these people stormed the US capitol with the intention of invalidating a presidential election, extrajudicially executing vice president of the United States Mike Pence and speaker Nanci Pelosi, after they murdered a police officer, beat up a bunch of police officers with poles carrying American flags, trashed the building and smeared their own excrement all over the inside of it, Hillary Clinton calling these people merely 'deplorable' seems like a pretty polite description.

Blaming this on MBA/Accountant culture is a fallacy. A good businessman/woman realises what the core factors are that are essential to making a business profitable and that profit is not the only measure of success. In this case it is above all safe aircraft. Boeing, Airbus, they all stand and fall with their safety record. Anybody who forgets that is a poor MBA/Accountant/Business-person. The problem with America’s business community is that it seems to think Gordon Gekko is someone to emulate.

The point is not so much that the second crash was avoidable, the real point is that the first crash was entirely avoidable. If Boeing had connected two AoA sensors to the MCAS system so it could figure out when one of the AoA sensors broke down and issue a warning or react in some other way (Airbus uses triple redundancy) those pilots wouldn't have had to master yet another 'simple remedy' for something that greedy and incompetent executives at Boeing screwed up. On top of that the AoA Disagree message was 'unintentionally disabled' and the AoA DISAGREE display on the pilots displays that the (defective) MCAS software relied on was a 'paid optional extra' which quite a lot of airlines did not pick up on because including one was considered a no brainer. They can blame the pilots as much as they want. After all, the pilots are not here to defend themselves so they are easy targets and I suppose blaming them is good business strategy, but in the end it was still Boeing management that made the conscious choice have the MCAS built with a single point of failure by an inexperienced contractor purely out of geed. In an industry where redundancy in everything is a basic requirement, quality is king and you stand and fall with your safety reputation, all of Boeings fuckups in this sorry story are basically unforgivable.

From what you hear, people are saying, there are those who would say, it has been suggested, ... stop pretending to be Fox News and pony up some hard data. Not that it will do you much good. You could make the same claim about any luxury brand or product having this same kind of 'effect'. That 'effect' is why people buy luxury anything. A luxury car/truck isn't really a car/truck, it's an insult that you can drive.

Nope, for the most part, hardly anybody in Europe gives a crap about what kind of phone you've got your nose buried in. Most Europeans will be annoyed at you for having your nose buried in a phone, any phone at all, instead of paying attention to what you are doing, ... like driving. Nobody much cares about the brand. I expect I's much the same is true in the USA and Asia.

This is true.

As I already stated, money is on some state owned or private but state controlled corporation in China (with generous subsidies form the Chinese taxpayer) eating Space X's lunch just like BYD and a bunch of other Chinese EV manufacturers (with generous subsidies form the Chinese taxpayer) are about to eat Tesla's lunch. I know you think Elon is some kind of super genius real world Tony Stark but there is no way Space X is going to compete with Nation States in the long term, especially China.

For one thing, Falcon 9 is only partially reusable, even if the Space X fan-club members like to skip over the 'partially' bit. Secondly, Ariane won't be dissolved or privatised for the same reason that military and police usually aren't privatised, even in the USA. These are capabilities governments hugely value and a self sufficiency in satellite launches is too so the EU governments will be more than happy to continue subsidising Ariane. Furthermore, Ariane and a bunch of others are working on partially reusable launch vehicles so Space X's advantage is temporary. Unless Elon retreats to his genus lab and successfully solves fully reusable single stage to orbit, Space X will be getting some competition sooner rather than later and if it isn't Ariane it will be somebody else. My money is on some state owned or private but state controlled corporation in China (with generous subsidies form the Chinese taxpayer) eating Space X's lunch just like BYD and a bunch of other Chinese EV manufacturers (with generous subsidies form the Chinese taxpayer) are about to eat Tesla's lunch.

I knew a lot of employers are lying sociopathic shit-stains, but now we have an exact figure ... 40% of them. I bet a whole bunch of these assholes are bringing in people for fake interviews and making them pay the travel costs. If somebody wants you to pay the costs of travelling to an interview, tell them (very politely) to go fuck themselves unless your costs are a small to small-ish sum and you don't mind burning some time on what seems to be an almost 50-50 chance to be a fake interview as it is a real one.

In that case maybe these venture capitalist genius princes of the universe should pour there money into something with better profitability prospects than Uber, Lyft and the rest of that ilk until Elon Musk perfects the fully autonomous vehicle technology he promised us back in 2016.

What I find funny is that rich people rage against 'affirmative action' to provide opportunities for minorities and the poor but when they finally succeed in abolishing affirmative action for these groups they were surprised to find out that legacy admissions is itself a form of affirmative action for a minority i.e. their own idiot kids. If you want to call yourself a winner of the greatest meritocracy in human history, having your rich daddy pull strings and bribe your way ahead of more able and intelligent applicants does not count as 'winning the meritocracy'.

It's easy to outcompete everybody else when you have a global monopoly (also sometimes known as a 92% global market share) on web searches and enough money to either make anybody who looks like they may become a threat an offer they can't refuse or just squash them under foot if they are disinclined to accept your offer. There is a big difference between healthy constructive competition and what Google does.

No.

That sounds like something somebody would say who started the process of obtaining knowledge, dropped out and now wants to get all the benefits of having finished what he started without ever actually doing so. You don't get a medal for dropping out of the marathon and never crossing the finish line. If a degree is proof of anything, at the very least it proves that you have the persistence, character and ability to start a very difficult process and finish it. For an employer that has to be just about the most important single skill any perspective employee must have regardless of the job description.